‘Dreamers’ deserve strong legal defense from Trump administration

Getty

In this 2015 file photo, President Obama talks with young unauthorized immigrants given some legal protections against deportation by his executive order. The Trump may not defend the order against a pending legal challenge by 10 states.

In this 2015 file photo, President Obama talks with young unauthorized immigrants given some legal protections against deportation by his executive order. The Trump may not defend the order against a pending legal challenge by 10 states. (Getty)

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program established by President Obama’s executive order is both humane and worthwhile. It provides an estimated million-plus young unauthorized immigrants who are on track for constructive, productive lives — colloquially known as “Dreamers” — with some legal protections against deportation. In February, President Trumpbacked away from his previous hardline position by allowing the program to continue and hailing its beneficiaries as “incredible kids.” This stance was affirmed by the Department of Homeland Security last month when it announced those covered by the program could continue to seek extensions of work permits.

Since Trump’s tough rhetoric alone is credited with sharply reducing the number of unauthorized immigrants trying to enter the United States since his election, he has political cover as well as good reason to show the “heart” he’s promised to display in considering the fate of the Dreamers.

But others in his administration don’t seem to be on the same page. Attorney General Jeff Sessions offered clear hints of disagreement with Trump in April. Sessions’ views are almost certainly why Homeland Security Secretary John Kellytold members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus on Wednesday that he did not expect the administration to defend the program against a challenge to its legality expected to be brought in September by a Texas-led coalition of 10 states. Kelly said that while he supported the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy, lawyers inside and outside the administration expressed considerable doubt that courts would find it acceptable.

If the president actually believes what he said about Dreamers in February, then he should order his Justice Department to defend the program. A court defeat is possible but not certain. A 2016 Supreme Court decision in a challenge to another Obama executive order on immigration showed there are four justices who believe presidents should be accorded flexibility in deciding how to enforce immigration laws, and there is no way to know with certitude how new Justice Neil Gorsuch would vote, or whether unpredictable swing Justice Anthony Kennedy would once again break with the court’s conservative bloc in favor of a policy he might consider good for the nation.

Ultimately, however, the best approach is for Congress to pass legislation writing the protections from Obama’s executive order into law. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, met with immigration advocates this week to began talking about such a measure. Getting comprehensive immigration reform through Congress has seemed impossible in recent years. But given that House Speaker Paul Ryan has often spokencompassionately about Dreamers, it seems plausible that a narrow bill helping them out might pass. And given what Trump recognizes as Dreamers’ great potential, this wouldn’t just be an act of compassion. It would be good for America.